W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > August 2010

XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2010 August 30

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:45:03 -0400
Message-ID: <9B2DE9094C827E44988F5ADAA6A2C5DAB728F1@HQ-MAIL9.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>

The XML Core WG telcons are every other week.

Our next telcon will be 2010 September 8.


Status and open actions
=======================

TAG concern wrt 3023bis, +xml media types and fragids
-----------------------------------------------------
Henry sent email about this at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Jun/0006

3023bis says that the +xml implies that the resource is suitable for 
processing by generic xml processors.  And it says that such xml
processors should handle fragment ids.  Specifically, handling the
fragment identifiers in an rdf+xml document is not something that a 
generic xml processor could do.

The TAG was leaning toward removing the statement from 3023bis that
says that fragid syntax and semantics is something that any generic
xml processor can handle in a +xml resource.

Norm and John (among others) weighed in; see the thread at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jun/thread.html#msg125
Norm's latest (as of July 18) is at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jul/0020

Per Noah's email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Aug/0003
there will be no new status until September.


Shortname referencing XLink versus XLink 1.1
--------------------------------------------
Mohamed asked if xlink should point to xlink11; see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Aug/0003

We asked Ian about our options, and he pointed us to
 http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/
as an example of the kind of thing we could add to XLink 1.0.
Several WG members expressed support for doing something like
that.  We should make a decision on our next telcon.


Associating Stylesheets
-----------------------
See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-ss

We are working toward a PER for AssocSS 2nd Edition.

Our latest public draft is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2010/04/xml-stylesheet/

The first transition request for AssocSS is at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Apr/0034
We had an unsuccessful transition call.  See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Apr/0057

The editors drafted new wording for Section 2 Conformance; see
http://www.w3.org/XML/2010/05/xml-stylesheet/
http://www.w3.org/XML/2010/05/xml-stylesheet/diff.html

DanielG expressed acceptance of that draft at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Aug/0002

The WG decided in an email vote at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Aug/thread#ms
g30
to request transition to PER.

Paul sent out a draft transition request at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Aug/0041
that awaits actions by Henry to move forward.

ACTION to Henry:  Prepare the PER-ready document directory.

ACTION to Henry:  Update the DoC with DanielG's acceptance.

ACTION to Paul (once things are ready):  Send in the AssocSS
PER Transition Request.

ACTION to Liam (once Paul sends the trans req):  Do whatever 
is necessary to get AssocSS out as PER.


XML Model
---------

XML Model is being balloted by SC34 until the ? of August.
In the middle of September SC34 will have a face-to-face meeting
where they will discuss comments received during the ballot.

Jirka will bring SC34 comments, concerns, and proposed resolutions
back to XML Core WG in the second half of September.
Received on Monday, 30 August 2010 13:46:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:42 UTC